In recent years, “super” department stores, such as the ubiquitous Wal-Mart or Meijers, and warehouse stores, such as Costco or Sam's Club, have proliferated. Customers are primarily drawn to these types of establishments because the corresponding retailers maintain a large inventory of products and/or to sell products in “bundles” or in bulk, both of which generally allow for lower retail prices to be maintained.
To attract customers away from the competition, these types of retailers are constantly searching for ways to offer their products at the lowest  possible retail price, such as by cutting in-house costs while retaining a reasonable profit margin. One area often targeted for cost savings and price reduction is product distribution. For example, most of the warehouse-type stores or “super” department stores no longer rely on an offsite “warehouse” for storing large amounts of articles for a long period of time, since this increases the overall cost (which in turn drives up the retail price or reduces the profit, even if a competitive retail price is maintained). Rather, the retailer simply has a central or regional distribution center that receives the articles in bulk from the manufacturer or an intermediary, such as a contract packager. The primary function of the distribution center is to sort the articles or products received in bulk for routing directly to the stores in scientifically determined quantities for placement directly on the shelves to meet consumer demand (as measured by recent sales history data gathered by the retail store's computer system each time a cashier scans an identification (bar) code on a product being sold).
To facilitate distribution efficiency, it is known to bundle pre-packaged products or articles in “multi-packs,” each comprising a certain predetermined quantity of articles for distribution. For example, in the case of ink-jet cartridges for printers, the manufacturer pre-packages each cartridge individually, but then may further “bundle” a pre-determined number of the individually packaged cartridges together (e.g., a “two” or “four” pack), usually for more efficient distribution. In the exemplary cases of a two or four pack of articles, it should be appreciated that the counting and shipping redundancy is essentially reduced two or four fold, respectively, which results  in a more efficient operation and consequently reduces the retailer's costs.
However, in the case of a retailer or manufacturer, a significant problem may arise in checking the multi-pack bundle into the distribution center, which is required to later account for the amount of stock of a particular article on hand and maintain the most efficient distribution operation. Usually, this check-in procedure involves the use of an automated scanner for scanning a machine-readable identification code, such as a universal product code (UPC) or “bar” code, placed on the bundle containing multiple articles. This “bundle” identification code typically includes information on, among other things, the type and number of articles in the bundle, but may even include other important information, such as the presence of anti-theft devices on the articles or in their packaging (usually only in the case where the manufacturer's distribution center is involved). However, a problem arises because the automated scanner cannot differentiate between the individual identification codes on the articles and the bundle identification code. Consequently, if the scanner inadvertently scans the individual identification code (and assuming it recognizes this “universal” code), it may reflect the presence of only a single article in inventory (or none, if the identification code is not recognized by the system), rather than the plurality of articles actually present. As a result, the distribution center may ship substantially more articles than it believes were received, and certainly more than requested. This same product diversity with the aforementioned problems exist in the manufacturer's distribution center and results in the similar requirements for package identification. For example, in the case of  a retailer, if checked in as individual articles, ten four packs (forty articles) could be shipped to a particular location, when in fact the retailer's computer system shows a deficit of only ten articles. Hence, the retailer would receive four times as many articles as are needed for placement on the shelves, which is obviously deleterious. Using this same example, if the automated scanner scans, but does not recognize the individual identification codes on the articles in four article multi-packs, but they nevertheless proceed to a temporary on-site storage area, the distribution center may show no articles on hand available for shipping, when in fact it received forty that were not properly accounted for (and are likely now lost in the system). As can easily be appreciated, this problem leads to much confusion, increases short-term costs, and substantially reduces efficiency.
Placing multiple articles in a cardboard “carrier,” such as a tray or sleeve, is known. These carriers are normally designed to be used in a fixed orientation, and usually cover only certain sides of the group of articles forming the bundle. Therefore, the carrier may not obscure the individual identification codes on the lateral sides or tops of the articles. Consequently, even when such cardboard carriers are used, manual scanning of the bundle may be required to achieve an accurate count.
Another problem with the carrier is that the manufacturer typically purchases only a single shipping container or carton capable of receiving a certain number of the pre-packaged articles in relatively tight engagement, regardless of whether they are pre-bundled or not. The ability to pack the articles tightly in the shipping carton is of course important in  most cases to prevent shifting and concomitant damage during delivery. However, the presence of the cardboard tray or carrier may interfere with the ability of the manufacturer or their contract packager to return all the bundles of articles to the original shipping carton in an easy or efficient manner. Not only can this lead to wasted time, but may also result in cartons being shipped with fewer articles when bundling is undertaken (or may necessitate the use of different sizes of cartons, depending on whether the articles are bundled or not, which significantly complicates the overall process).
Dark-colored or opaque films for use in shrink-wrapping an article are also known in the art. Such films are usually used because of their light-transmission properties; e.g., for blocking ultraviolet or infrared radiation to prevent degradation of the colored surfaces of the product-containing packages, or to achieve a particular aesthetic effect. While shrink-wrapping an article entirely in such film would ostensibly preclude the reading of the individual identification code, an undesirable consequence is that the advertising and product information on the article is obscured. Hence, once the article (or a bundle of articles) reaches the retail location, the worker checking the items and routing them to a particular location must either remove the film or scan an externally applied identification code to learn the contents, which is inefficient. Also, if a bundle of articles entirely wrapped in an opaque or dark colored film is slated for placement on display at a “warehouse” store for sale as a single unit, the prospective customer would be unable to see the advertising indicia or product information applied to the underlying article. In some instances, the ability to perceive or visualize the  advertising indicia or product information is crucial, since it may make the difference in the customer selecting one brand over another and consummating the sale.
Another approach could be to apply the label bearing the “bundle code” over the corresponding surfaces of the articles bearing the individual identification codes. However, modern sophisticated automated scanners are capable of reading the identification codes through conventional single-ply, while-colored, clear adhesive-backed labels, or the scanner or a human may still read the code if only a portion of it is covered by the label. For this reason, the use of such labels in an attempt to cover identification codes alone may not be a viable solution.
Accordingly, a need is identified for an improved method for bundling a plurality of articles that overcomes the above-identified limitations and shortcomings.